This order condones a delay of 2839 days in filing a review petition. The court relied on Kanak Chandra Sarma to hold that limitation does not apply to review petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution and disposed of the application.
Condonation of delay of 2839 days in filing the review petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010148022021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1708/2021
SASHADHAR PATOWARY S/O- LATE HARI CH. PATOWARY, GUWAHATI PUBLIC SCHOOL ROAD, PANJABARI, BATAHGHULI, P.O. BHAGARBARI, P.S. SATGAON, KAMRUP(M), GUWAHATI-781037.
VERSUS
THE HONBLE CHAIRMAN, APDCL, AEGCL, APGCL AND 3 ORS. BIJULEE BHAWAN, PALTANBAZAR, GUWAHATI-781001.
2:THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (D AND S)
APDCL (L.A.Z.) BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTANBAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 3:THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER ( F AND A) APDCL BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTANBAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 4:THE ASSTT. GENERAL MANAGER (EXECUTIVE ENGINEER) GUWAHATI ELECTRICAL DIVISION (C) A.P.D.C.L. ULUBARI GUWAHATI-781007
Advocate for the Petitioner : PETITIONER IN PERSON
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, APDCL
Page No.# 2/3
Linked Case : REVIEW PETITION NO. 8168/2021 (FILING NUMBER)
SASHADHAR PATOWARY
VERSUS
THE HONBLE CHAIRMAN A.P.D.C.L A.E.G.C.L AND A.P.G.C.L AND 3 ORS. B
-----------Advocate for : PETITIONER IN PERSON Advocate for : appearing for THE HONBLE CHAIRMAN A.P.D.C.L A.E.G.C.L AND A.P.G.C.L AND 3 ORS. B
BEFORE
HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA
ORDER
Date : 08.08.2022
(R.M. Chhaya, CJ)
Heard Mr. P. Mahanta, learned amicus curiae. Also heard Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned Standing Counsel, APDCL for the respondents.
This interlocutory application has been filed for condonation of delay of 2839 days in filing the connected review petition against the judgment and order dated 04.06.2012 passed by Division Bench in W.A. No. 16/2012.
In Kanak Chandra Sarma –vs- The Board of Secondary Eduation, Assam & 2 Ors., reported in (1995) 1 GLR 116 , it has been held by this Court that the law of limitation shall not apply while filing a petition for review of an order passed in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Page No.# 3/3
This interlocutory application is, therefore, disposed of.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the law of limitation applies to filing a review petition against an order under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kanak Chandra Sarma vs The Board of Secondary Eduation, Assam & 2 Ors.Relied on¶25
(1995) 1 GLR 116
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sashadhar Patowary
The Honble Chairman, APDCL, AEGCL, APGCL and 3 Ors.
Soumitra Saikia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
